Tag Archives: protectionism

The Rich “And Everyone Else” – Citigroup Global Strategist

27 Jul

“The earth is being held up by the muscular arms of its entrepreneur-plutocrats, like it, or not.”

– Citigroup ‘Plutonomy’ memos, 2005

“A plutonomy is a form of capitalism that is designed to make the rich who control a nation’s government and its economy—aka, the plutocrats—even richer.”

– Rational Wiki

Here is the result of the creeping cancer of usury — the root of capital-ism — and the usurer class.

As told by one of their own — a “global strategist”, for Citigroup.

From the Wall Street Journal, 2007 (my emphasis added):

It’s well known that the rich have an outsized influence on the economy.

The nation’s top 1% of households own more than half the nation’s stocks, according to the Federal Reserve. They also control more than $16 trillion in wealth — more than the bottom 90%.

Yet a new body of research from Citigroup suggests that the rich have other, more-surprising impacts on the economy.

Ajay Kapur, global strategist at Citigroup, and his research team came up with the term “Plutonomy” in 2005 to describe a country that is defined by massive income and wealth inequality. According to their definition, the U.S. is a Plutonomy, along with the U.K., Canada and Australia.

In a series of research notes over the past year, Kapur and his team explained that Plutonomies have three basic characteristics.

1. They are all created by “disruptive technology-driven productivity gains, creative financial innovation, capitalist friendly cooperative governments, immigrants…the rule of law and patenting inventions. Often these wealth waves involve great complexity exploited best by the rich and educated of the time.”

2. There is no “average” consumer in Plutonomies. There is only the rich “and everyone else.” The rich account for a disproportionate chunk of the economy, while the non-rich account for “surprisingly small bites of the national pie.” Kapur estimates that in 2005, the richest 20% may have been responsible for 60% of total spending.

3. Plutonomies are likely to grow in the future, fed by capitalist-friendly governments, more technology-driven productivity and globalization.

Of course, Kapur says there are risks to the Plutonomy, including war, inflation, financial crises, the end of the technological revolution and populist political pressure. Yet he maintains that the “the rich are likely to keep getting even richer, and enjoy an even greater share of the wealth pie over the coming years.”

All of which means that, like it or not, inequality isn’t going away and may become even more pronounced in the coming years.

Little wonder then, that politicians who support “protectionism” of national sovereignty — Barnaby Joyce and Bob Katter spring to mind — are mocked, smeared, and pilloried in the media as “populists”.

That “immigration” is such a vexed issue — with the general public concerned about it, and politicians (despite their rhetoric) enabling it.

That “financial innovation” presses relentlessly onwards, aided and abetted by both “sides” of politics — think covered bonds (to prop up the banks’ debt-financed housing Ponzi scheme), “emissions” trading (a gigantic derivatives time bomb), and most recently, the Rudd government’s sole idea for “managing the economic transition”; to turn Australia into a “financial services centre” for the region:

Encouraging competition and efficiency would improve the range and choice of financial products available to consumers and promote increased exports of financial services.

…Labor knows that increased trade in financial services will increase Australia’s growth prospects and standard of living.

We know positioning Australia as a financial services centre in the region means that we would be able to offer increased job opportunities for a range of skilled workers in the financial sector.

For those with eyes to see, it is perfectly clear that both “sides” of Australian politics — and the Greens too — are simply puppets of the Plutonomy.

Citizens who vote for any of them are — whether they realise it or not — actually voting for their own continued enslavement, and, gradual destruction.

The following video featuring white collar criminologist William Black, is a must-watch:


Usury is the root of the plutocrats’ power.

It is their most powerful weapon.

Like cancer, it is a silent, invasive killer. One that consumes the living, healthy cells of its host.

To feed its own relentless “growth”.

Anyone talking “solutions” who is not talking about eliminating usury, is not worth listening to.

“There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one striking at the root.”

– Henry David Thoreau


How Do You Spell Sycophant? L.I.B.E.R.A.L.

16 Nov

From the Sydney Morning Herald:

Libs angered by Nationals going alone on policy

Liberal frontbenchers and MPs were angry yesterday when the Nationals leader, Warren Truss, and the Senate leader, Barnaby Joyce, ridiculed a free-trade pact entered into by Australia, the US and other nations at the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation summit in Hawaii.

The Liberals support free trade and the proposed partnership and were dismayed yesterday when Mr Truss rubbished it as a ”thought bubble” by APEC leaders, including the US President, Barack Obama, who arrives in Australia tomorrow for a 26-hour visit.

”It is simply inconceivable that the United States would agree to remove trade barriers in what is an election year,” said Mr Truss, a former trade minister.

I agree with Mr Truss.

And loudly applaud his having the testicular fortitude to say so.

Although I’d go even further. The USA has form. It is inconceivable that the United States would agree to remove their trade barriers at all.

Despite Mr Obama announcing at last year’s APEC in Yokohama, Japan, that he wanted progress on the partnership when leaders met next in Hawaii, Mr Truss said the announcement on Sunday was designed ”to make a conference look like it was useful”.

The Nationals believe the deal could have an adverse impact on sectors such as agriculture.

Mr Truss’s comments were at odds with Coalition policy and comments by the deputy leader and foreign affairs spokeswoman, Julie Bishop, who believes the partnership needs to be encouraged.

Privately, Liberals were furious. ”It’s a US initiative and we should embrace it,’‘ one said.


We should embrace an “initiative” because it’s a US initiative?!?!

That’s the kind of “logic” that got us wasting billions of dollars … and far more importantly, priceless lives … in Iraq and Afghanistan, dancing to the tune of the bankers’ rhythm-and-blues smash hit, Warring About My Endless Profits.

It’s the kind of “logic” that has our banking system buried under $16.8 Trillion in derivatives … with the galactically bigger carbon derivatives scam still to come.

And it’s the kind of logic that prompted our World’s Greatest Finance Minister to use taxpayers money to buy up $20 billion worth of “financial weapons of mass destruction” known as Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities (RMBS).

Not familiar with that word “sycophant”?

That’s ok.

Here’s a synonym.


Now, while “brown-noser” is essentially identical to “sycophant”, it is spelled a little differently.


And that, dear reader, is a huge part of the problem in this country.

Two “sides”.  No essential difference.

Like “brown-noser” and “sycophant”, one is just a cruder version of the other.

And the truth is, both are always trying to insert something up your @$$.

It’s time for the Nationals to really go it alone.

The whole hog.

I’d actually consider (cough, splutter) joining if they did.

Provided one of their independent policies, was to never again be a party to sending other people’s kids off to die as part of a bankster-enriching Coalition Of The (S)Willing.

%d bloggers like this: